Two sorts of philosophical therapy: Ordinary language philosophy, social criticism and the Frankfurt school

IF 0.7 3区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY
Tom Whyman
{"title":"Two sorts of philosophical therapy: Ordinary language philosophy, social criticism and the Frankfurt school","authors":"Tom Whyman","doi":"10.1177/01914537231203525","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In a recent article, Fabian Freyenhagen argues that we should understand first-generation Frankfurt School critical theory (in particular, the work of Adorno and Horkheimer) as being defined by a kind of ‘linguistic turn’ analogous to one present in the later Wittgenstein. Here, I elaborate on this hypothesis – initially by calling it into question, by detailing Herbert Marcuse’s extensive criticisms of Wittgenstein (and other analytic philosophers of language) in One-Dimensional Man. While Marcuse is harshly critical of analytic ordinary language philosophy, he is much more sympathetic to a different sort of ordinary language philosophy, which he unpacks with reference to Karl Kraus. I show how, by getting Marcuse’s criticisms of Wittgenstein and other analytic philosophers, and lauding of Kraus, into view, we can better understand the first generation of the Frankfurt School as having practised a sort of ‘non-quietistic’ philosophical therapy (that may or may not have been the sort of thing that Wittgenstein himself had in mind).","PeriodicalId":46930,"journal":{"name":"PHILOSOPHY & SOCIAL CRITICISM","volume":"39 2","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PHILOSOPHY & SOCIAL CRITICISM","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/01914537231203525","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In a recent article, Fabian Freyenhagen argues that we should understand first-generation Frankfurt School critical theory (in particular, the work of Adorno and Horkheimer) as being defined by a kind of ‘linguistic turn’ analogous to one present in the later Wittgenstein. Here, I elaborate on this hypothesis – initially by calling it into question, by detailing Herbert Marcuse’s extensive criticisms of Wittgenstein (and other analytic philosophers of language) in One-Dimensional Man. While Marcuse is harshly critical of analytic ordinary language philosophy, he is much more sympathetic to a different sort of ordinary language philosophy, which he unpacks with reference to Karl Kraus. I show how, by getting Marcuse’s criticisms of Wittgenstein and other analytic philosophers, and lauding of Kraus, into view, we can better understand the first generation of the Frankfurt School as having practised a sort of ‘non-quietistic’ philosophical therapy (that may or may not have been the sort of thing that Wittgenstein himself had in mind).
两种哲学疗法:日常语言哲学、社会批判和法兰克福学派
在最近的一篇文章中,Fabian Freyenhagen认为,我们应该理解第一代法兰克福学派批判理论(特别是阿多诺和霍克海默的作品)是由一种类似于后来维特根斯坦的“语言转向”来定义的。在这里,我详细阐述了这一假设——最初通过质疑它,通过详细描述赫伯特·马尔库塞在《单向度的人》中对维特根斯坦(和其他语言分析哲学家)的广泛批评。虽然马尔库塞严厉批评分析的日常语言哲学,但他更同情另一种不同的日常语言哲学,他参照卡尔·克劳斯(Karl Kraus)对其进行了剖析。通过马尔库塞对维特根斯坦和其他分析哲学家的批评,以及对克劳斯的赞扬,我展示了我们如何更好地理解法兰克福学派的第一代,因为他们已经实践了一种“非静寂主义”的哲学治疗(这可能是也可能不是维特根斯坦自己想要的那种东西)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
105
期刊介绍: In modern industrial society reason cannot be separated from practical life. At their interface a critical attitude is forged. Philosophy & Social Criticism wishes to foster this attitude through the publication of essays in philosophy and politics, philosophy and social theory, socio-economic thought, critique of science, theory and praxis. We provide a forum for open scholarly discussion of these issues from a critical-historical point of view. Philosophy & Social Criticism presents an international range of theory and critique, emphasizing the contribution of continental scholarship as it affects major contemporary debates.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信